Negotiations with city manager intensify

Saturday

Apr 12, 2014 at 7:10 AMApr 12, 2014 at 7:10 AM

By Matt DurrTwitter: @mdurrHDNHILLSDALE — Tensions continued to rise as negotiations between the City of Hillsdale and City Manager Linda Brown went forward last week.Brown's contract with the city expires on May 15 — and with a little more than a month until that expiration, negotiations have not run smoothly.At the April 9 Operations and Governance meeting, committee members Brian Watkins, Sally Kinney and Patrick Flannery met to discuss the terms of the contract and whether or not to send it to council for approval at its May 5 meeting. Brown's demands are nearly identical to her current contract except for one sticking point:Brown has asked for a one-time, lump-sum payment of $15,000 into her International City Managers Association (ICMA) retirement fund.The reasoning for the lump sum is based on an amount Brown believes she would have been entitled to were she still part of the Municipal Employees Retirement System (MERS).Before returning to the city's employ in 2011, Brown served as assistant city manager to former City Manager Michael Mitchell. When Brown was fired by Mitchell, she was no longer part of MERS and thanks to a rules change by the system, Brown could not rejoin MERS once she left.She was unaware of that rule change when she signed her first contract with the city in 2011.Brown said the $15,000 is what would have been paid into her MERS account had she not been terminated by Mitchell and is the only difference she is seeking from her current contract. Brown's current contract is a two-year deal with an optional third year which included a $91,000 annual salary, $1,000 a month in lieu of health insurance and a $6,370 annual contribution to her ICMA fund.That totals $98,370 a year.Brown is now seeking a one-year deal with an optional second year along with the one-time payment — making the total $113,370 this year and $98,370 if a second year happens. She is also seeking a six-month severance package should she be be fired prior to the end of her contract.The contract was initially discussed at the April 2 O&G meeting, but Flannery asked for more time to poll people in the city about their thoughts on the issue. At the April 9 meeting Flannery briefly reported on those discussions and his feelings on the deal."In a nutshell, it doesn't change anything — I think Linda should be the manager, but I just can't support the contract," he said, adding that he was OK with the severance package but not the $15,000 payment.Watkins asked what sorts of things Flannery discussed with members of the public. Flannery said he spoke to roughly a dozen people — but would not say what he discussed with citizens.Mayor Scott Sessions, who spoke during the public comments section of the meeting, also expressed his lack of support for the contract."I still have a problem with the $15,000 and also the severance package," Sessions said during the first public comment section. "I just have a problem with the way that the contract is presented, so I could not support that."Sessions had previously spoken on the issue at the April 2 meeting, expressing his concerns then as well.Watkins pointed out that even with Brown's one-time payment request her contract is still lower than what Mitchell made in his final deal — which totaled $119,961 a year with inflation. Brown's request is also less than what the Michigan Municipal League (MML) estimates is the average wage and benefits package for municipalities similar to Hillsdale, which is $117,447."I didn't come her to back intending to rob the city — I came back twice and I don't think my request is unreasonable," Brown said.Should the two sides fail to agree on a contract, the city would have to appoint an interim city manage — but that person could only serve in the role for 60 days before a permanent replacement must be found.Watkins said the MML estimates the cost of a city manager search can range between $8,000-$20,000.Watkins also said Brown could elect to sign a limited extension of her contract while negotiations continued, but Brown did not say if she would be willing sign a short-term extension."She does a wonderful job. I've been through the search thing," Kinney said. "Why try to fix something that's not broke is where I'm at right now."Flannery, however, would not budge on his stance and would not support the contract as presented. He did second Kinney's motion to send the contract to council for consideration at the May 5 meeting.Kinney and Watkins each voted in favor of sending the contract to council, but Flannery voted against it.During discussions, Watkins said it would be a benefit to the city to keep Brown on board while potentially grooming a candidate from within the city who could take over when Brown leaves. He also pointed out that keeping Brown is the cheapest option."No matter how you break it down numbers wise, no matter how you look at it, it's substantially cheaper to retain Linda at what she is asking than it is to look for somebody else," Watkins said. "It's not an if, this is what she wants and if she doesn't get it then she is going to go — and that's her choice."After the contract was sent to council, Sessions again weighed in on the issue and expressed his concerns."I've supported you right along, Linda, but I just can't see the city paying out when we're strapped for cash so much," he said. "Everybody keeps telling me how strapped for cash we are and that's a lot of money to me. I thought that should have been negotiated in your other contract."Although the contract was sent to council, another O&G meeting has been scheduled for April 28 at 6 p.m. because of potential violations of the Michigan Open Meetings Act that may have occurred during the April 9 meeting.Because council is currently comprised of seven members, Sessions' comments on the negotiations and whether he would support the contract may constitute a violation of the OMA.Should council be found in violation of the OMA in court, the likely outcome would be to invalidate the decisions and the committee would have to take actions again. In order to avoid a lengthy process, Watkins elected to reconvene the meeting on April 28 and make the decision under the guidelines of the OMA."Recognizing that the Operations & Governance Committee meeting that led to a decision regarding the city manager contract may have been in violation of the OMA, that meeting will be reconvened to ensure the deliberations and any subsequent recommendation is in compliance with the laws of Michigan and the expectations of the citizens we represent," Watkins said in statement.